Debian GNU/kFreeBSD got release status

[ephemera]

http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20091007

I think it's an odd match (fbsd kernel with Linux base), but it sounds interesting.

[robbak]

That's FreeBSD kernel with a GNU base. Linux is only the kernel, so this is Debian without the linux!

So, that's the organization of the linux filesystem, with the hardware support of BSD. Sounds like a bad joke to me. But, any further exposure is good.

[BSDfan666]

I'm with robbak(..sort of) on this, a GNU distribution of BSD is nothing worth celebrating about.

[jggimi]

According to slashdot, it's pronounced Nuke-Free-Beast.

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by ephemera

I think it's an odd match...

In the United States, there are various conservative movements attempting to ban genetic research to avoid any harm which might be caused by releasing such abominations into the environment.

Sometimes, they have have a point...

[TerryP]

nice one ocicat lol

I've always considered the projects taking *BSD kernels and smalling them into a Linux distro, to be a backroom project that no one cares about; if you like the kernel that much, use the OS it was made for; like the user land that much, use an OS that supports it lol.


To eaach there own.

[ephemera]

Originally Posted by ocicat

In the United States, there are various conservative movements attempting to ban genetic research to avoid any harm which might be caused by releasing such abominations into the environment.

Sometimes, they have have a point...

Good point.

Originally Posted by robbak

That's FreeBSD kernel with a GNU base. Linux is only the kernel, so this is Debian without the linux!

I had GNU in mind but somehow wrote Linux.
Well, at least in some aspects I find them indistinguishable.

[DutchDaemon]

Isn't there a secret BSDv3 license somewhere that states that a userland that interacts with a FreeBSD kernel automatically inherits the BSD license?

[ephemera]

I think one of the attractions might be the Debian package tools.
This is one of the weak points of FBSD. Ports is nice but it's not for everyone - it takes too much time & resources to compile software. The ability to select compile time options in ports is occasionally useful but I prefer the Debian way: stable software along with security updates.

[Carpetsmoker]

I think one of the attractions might be the Debian package tools.

IMO that's the prime reason to avoid Debian and anything related to it.

This is one of the weak points of FBSD. Ports is nice but it's not for everyone - it takes too much time & resources to compile software.

Packages on FreeBSD work very well (Better than Debian). You don't need to use ports.

[TerryP]

Originally Posted by DutchDaemon

Isn't there a secret BSDv3 license somewhere that states that a userland that interacts with a FreeBSD kernel automatically inherits the BSD license?

<sick-joke>I think you mean GPLv3.01 :-P</sick-joke>

[Carpetsmoker]

I saw that The Twilight Zone was celebrating it's 50th anniversary. Coincidence? I think not.

[ephemera]

I think Robbak describes it best: "Debian without the Linux".

Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker

Packages on FreeBSD work very well (Better than Debian). You don't need to use ports.

Maybe. But are the packages updated/maintained (including security fixes) after a fbsd release is out? Are there packages for all ports?

[Carpetsmoker]

But are the packages updated/maintained (including security fixes) after a fbsd release is out?

No, packages work pretty much like OpenBSD. You keep packages in sync with your main OS.
Snapshots are built though, and usually work fine.

Are there packages for all ports?

Yes, unless there are legal reasons for not making a package.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by ephemera

I think Robbak describes it best: "Debian without the Linux".

Maybe. But are the packages updated/maintained (including security fixes) after a fbsd release is out? Are there packages for all ports?

Yes, and no.

Packages are created when a release is made, and that release ships with all the different environment variables used by the pkg_* tools set for that specific release. Major app upgrades (KDE, Apache, GNOME, etc) will usually get updated packages built. Major security issues in more common apps will usually get updated packages built.

However, the package building cluster almost continuously builds packages for the -STABLE branches. IOW, if you manually set the environment variables to point to the 6-stable, 7-stable, or 8-stable directories on the FTP servers, then you will get (mostly) up-to-date packages. It's best to do this only when running the very latest release in each branch, so that the differences between your release and -STABLE are minimised.

There are even tools available to update installed apps using nothing but packages. portupgrade requires the ports tree to be installed, but the pkg_upgrade tool in bsdadminscripts works even without the ports tree installed.

So, yes, it is possible to have a binary-packages-only, up-to-date FreeBSD system. But, no, it's not done like that by default.

Forgot to mention, see the ports(7) man page for details on setting the PKG* environment variables.

[ephemera]

Thanks Phoenix.

Glad to know that using packages-only is an option.

[There0]

I do agree on the superiority of the pkg_add utility as opposed to anything I have used that any Linux has to offer.

I do use Ubuntu/Debian/BackTrack/Slax when I get a chance to, but rest assured that OpenBSD is far ahead in many quality utilities thanks to the work of gifted persons involved.

[aleunix]

I don't think that is a bad news.
This release will be available when Squeeze became stable (Debian 6).
Unfortunately seems that there will be some limits, for example although the support for the file system Zfs is included in the kernel, it seems that will not be available utilities to use the Zfs file system.
But i think is better see what happen instead to be prevented from the start.
Unfortunately don't exist an OS "perfect" and i think partially this problem is caused by the excessive fragmentation of the resources in so many different projects.

Note:
The other Debian project based on the kernel netbsd seem stalled.

[vermaden]

Originally Posted by aleunix

for example although the support for the file system Zfs is included in the kernel, it seems that will not be available utilities to use the Zfs file system.

Any sources/links for that?

[Oliver_H]

Originally Posted by vermaden

Any sources/links for that?

Well, it is something Debian and they will certainly cut out any firmware or software that isn't compatible with the GPL.